MANJULA ZAVERILAL KOTHARI MRS Vs. ZAVERILAL VITHALDAS KOTHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Manjula Zaverilal Kothari was the original opponent. She is the wife of respondent Zaverilal Vithaldas Kothari who filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Respondent alleged that he was married with the appellant on 19th April 1960 at Rajkot according to Hindu religious ceremony and custom of the caste and that his wife came to stay with him. Parents of the appellant are staying in Kuweit a small Shaikhdom in Persian Gulf. It appears respondent-husband was serving as professor and when the college closed for vacation husband and wife went to visit the parents of the wife at Kuweit. After the college reopened respondent- huaband alone returned and wife stayed behind stating that she was not well and she would join her husband after some time. Since then wife has not come to stay with the husband. It is alleged that somewhere in 1964 wife with her parents had come to Rajkot but she did not come and stay with the husband. Husband in his petition alleged that appellant-wife has withdrawn from his society without reasonable excuse and he is therefore entitled to a decree for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) Wife resisted the petition by her written statement Ex.12 inter alia contending that her husband has withdrawn from her society without just and reasonable cause. She admitted that they have separated since 10 August 1961 when the husband left Kuweit and since then they have never stayed together but looking to the conduct of the husband in that he was responsible for inflicting mental cruelty on her he is not entitled to a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. Wife rest content with filing her written statement and produced some correspondence between the parties but did not step into witness box and application on her behalf to examine her on commission was rejected.

(3.) The learned trial judge was of the opinion that even though wife had withdrawn from the society of the husband she did so for a reasonable cause because the husband was guilty of inflicting mental cruelty on the wife. In accordance with this finding the learned trial Judge dismissed the petition of the husband for restitution of conjugal rights. Husband preferred Regular Civil appeal No. 51 of 1971 in the Court of the District Judge at Rajkot. The learned District Judge was of the opinion that husband has satisfactorily established that the wife has withdrawn from the society of the husband and that she had no reasonable excuse for withdrawing from the society of the husband and that the husband was not guilty of inflicting any mental or physical cruelty on the wife. In accordance with this finding the learned District Judge allowed the appeal preferred by the husband and decreed the suit for restitution of conjugal rights. The wife having been aggrieved with this judgment and decree has preferred this appeal.